A question about valuations...

[zeus22]

Disclaimer...even though I have an account with Beckett, it's solely to "assist" me in trade values and when I'm buying cards on COMC/eBay. Bottom line, if I really like the card, I'll pay whatever (within reason, of course). In addition, I understand that the marketplace has adorned the YG's as the defacto RC and therefore their values resonate as such.

What I don't understand....
How is it possible that cards such as the new inaugural Ultimate Introductions rookie set have 1/2 to a 1/3 of the "value" of a YG's card?? There is absolutely no comparison in which card looks & feels like a premium Beckett classified RC. Even my 11 year old son looked at a Matthews Introductions card and commented on "how can the YG's be worth even half of this card?"

For those that aren't aware of the prices...Mitch Marner UI is a $40 card, Patrik Laine UI is a $50 card, Auston Matthews UI is a $120 card. Their respective YG's are Beckett valued at $120, $150 and $250.

And by the way...I'm not complaining...I feel very fortunate to be sitting on 17 Matthews YG cards.

Do you feel this is mostly due to the "tradition" of collecting the YG cards? and maybe because the UI cards have no previous history or track record? Am I missing something else as I'm fairly new coming back to the hobby a year ago?

Please feel free to add your thoughts....thanks!

[RGM81]

Demand is the key element driving these valuations.

Casual and hardcore collectors alike chase YG's. Not a lot of people, whether it's due to the price tag of Ultimate, design, etc. have the same desire to chase these cards.

The subjective nature of what's cool in the hobby often has a big effect on these types of things.

Back in the day when it was Panini and UD, the natural "head to head" matchup to look at was Contenders vs SP Authentic. The Contenders RC's often had a lower print run than the Future Watch autos of SP Authentic--600 vs. 999, IIRC. And yet, FWA's pretty much always booked higher because of the legacy of the set, the UD name, etc.

[30ranfordfan]

Like RGM81 said.... it's all about collectiblity.

Lots of people chase the YGs, simply because that set has been around in one form or another since 1990. Most people don't care much about a non-serial numbered, non-autograph RC from any other set - no matter how "premium" the set is.

For how rare YGs are not, they command big bucks for the biggest names.

One trend Upper Deck has been following the last few years, in various sets, has been multiple cards of Rookies in the "base set".

So Ultimate Collection: Laine is card #99, and then he's also card #159, which is an autograph card #ed to 99.

IMO - If they just ditched the unnumered card... gave another 50 players base cards... and upped the production of the SP'd Rookie Autos to 199: The Auto of /199 would end up being worth more (because it would have the RC tag). They do this in Trilogy too, and I think maybe one more set?

[zeus22]

Demand is the key element driving these valuations.

Casual and hardcore collectors alike chase YG's. Not a lot of people, whether it's due to the price tag of Ultimate, design, etc. have the same desire to chase these cards.

The subjective nature of what's cool in the hobby often has a big effect on these types of things.

Back in the day when it was Panini and UD, the natural "head to head" matchup to look at was Contenders vs SP Authentic. The Contenders RC's often had a lower print run than the Future Watch autos of SP Authentic--600 vs. 999, IIRC. And yet, FWA's pretty much always booked higher because of the legacy of the set, the UD name, etc.

I absolutely hear what you're saying...but, isn't there also a 'supply' variable to the perceived valuation? UD Ultimate is certainly not demanded as much as UD Series 1 & 2, but the supply of cards are also significantly less.

I mean the end game for me is I'm going to collect the cards that appeal to me most. It just blows me away that an Acetate Rookie Card that has been deemed a RC by Beckett can be "valued" (and I use that word very subjectively) so much less than the mass produced YG card.

I think they got it wrong....just my humble opinion.

[30ranfordfan]

supply & demand are the two keys, and you're bang on. There is much less supply of these than the YG. If I was going to make a bet: There's 1k(ish) copies of Ultimate, and something obscene like 15k copies of the YG (and I'm probably erring on the low side there).

Even if a skew that more... and say that for every Ultimate RC produced there was 25 YGs: The ratio is even more skewed for the number of collectors that want the cards. Find a person searching for that Ultimate RC, and you can probably find 100 looking for the YG.

I absolutely hear what you're saying...but, isn't there also a 'supply' variable to the perceived valuation? UD Ultimate is certainly not demanded as much as UD Series 1 & 2, but the supply of cards are also significantly less.

I mean the end game for me is I'm going to collect the cards that appeal to me most. It just blows me away that an Acetate Rookie Card that has been deemed a RC by Beckett can be "valued" (and I use that word very subjectively) so much less than the mass produced YG card.

I think they got it wrong....just my humble opinion.

[zeus22]

Like RGM81 said.... it's all about collectiblity.

Lots of people chase the YGs, simply because that set has been around in one form or another since 1990. Most people don't care much about a non-serial numbered, non-autograph RC from any other set - no matter how "premium" the set is.

For how rare YGs are not, they command big bucks for the biggest names.

One trend Upper Deck has been following the last few years, in various sets, has been multiple cards of Rookies in the "base set".

So Ultimate Collection: Laine is card #99, and then he's also card #159, which is an autograph card #ed to 99.

IMO - If they just ditched the unnumered card... gave another 50 players base cards... and upped the production of the SP'd Rookie Autos to 199: The Auto of /199 would end up being worth more (because it would have the RC tag). They do this in Trilogy too, and I think maybe one more set?

Thanks for your input 30ranfordfan. I'm still trying to learn much about the hobby as I just returned back to collecting last year.

I highlighted something you mentioned. I believe you are correct about the non-serial numbered, non-auto card from sets other than YG. But comparing apples to apples....

$30BV Marner MVP RC (from a mass-produced inexpensive set with no real collectability) or a $40BV Marner Ultimate Introductions Acetate RC (from a premium set).

I can't understand why the UI is only $10 more than the MVP and $80 less than it's YG cousin.

[zeus22]

"Find a person searching for that Ultimate RC, and you can probably find 100 looking for the YG."

Great point!! My education continues.... Thank you!

[30ranfordfan]

That's a very valid point....

With MVP the cards were only available via redemptions though - which I think were inserted 1 per case (you got the "division set") which makes them pretty tough to come by.

So say you want the Marner: It's already a pretty SP'd card (maybe even more SP'd than that Ultimate). If you want the redemption - you're redeeming it for multiple RCs (including Matthews) so the price is pumped up that way. Want the single? You need to find someone that is breaking up a fairly hard to find set.

Look at OPC Platinum. A nice fancy looking set, where cards aren't all that rare. You can easily buy that online for $1.50 + s/h.

Trilogy is #ed 999, and the set is pretty similar to Ultimate - in that there is also rarer tiers of the Rookies... that are lower print runs, autographed, and not tagged as RCs. You can get the #ed Trilogy for about $15 pretty easy - that Ultimate is almost for sure going to go for $30+, and maybe get into the $40+ range.

Thanks for your input 30ranfordfan. I'm still trying to learn much about the hobby as I just returned back to collecting last year.

I highlighted something you mentioned. I believe you are correct about the non-serial numbered, non-auto card from sets other than YG. But comparing apples to apples....

$30BV Marner MVP RC (from a mass-produced inexpensive set with no real collectability) or a $40BV Marner Ultimate Introductions Acetate RC (from a premium set).

I can't understand why the UI is only $10 more than the MVP and $80 less than it's YG cousin.

[RGM81]

I absolutely hear what you're saying...but, isn't there also a 'supply' variable to the perceived valuation? UD Ultimate is certainly not demanded as much as UD Series 1 & 2, but the supply of cards are also significantly less.

I mean the end game for me is I'm going to collect the cards that appeal to me most. It just blows me away that an Acetate Rookie Card that has been deemed a RC by Beckett can be "valued" (and I use that word very subjectively) so much less than the mass produced YG card.

I think they got it wrong....just my humble opinion.

Well let's take a look at a guy like Arturri Lehkonen from the Habs. Good kid, almost 20 goals in his rookie season.

He didn't really get the proper RC treatment from UD last year (few autographs, but never the ARP's or similar cards that other key rookies get) and his only card in Ultimate is that Ultimate Introductions. Doesn't have the auto RC /299. One would think the value of that card would be pretty high since Habs collectors can only get that card (and parallels) if they want an Ultimate Lehkonen.

Quick ebay search says that card isn't even worth $10...and that's with a very short supply. There's only five completed sales and one live copy on there.

It's weird, for sure.